• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Vertical integration coming soon to a packer near you

However modern pig production is in environmentally controlled houses with feed rations formulated for exact intake in exact temperatures.

Cows don't do well indoors, feed can't be all ground and fed through augers.

1 line of genetically identical cows won't be adapted to all different areas that are economically viable to raise cows in.
 
Jason said:
However modern pig production is in environmentally controlled houses with feed rations formulated for exact intake in exact temperatures.

Cows don't do well indoors, feed can't be all ground and fed through augers.

1 line of genetically identical cows won't be adapted to all different areas that are economically viable to raise cows in.
Click to expand...

Jason I will agree up to a certain point. If each area would be uniform that would work also but there are VERY FEW that can maintain uniform carcas traits in one herd. Canadian breeders and southern breeders put out the same uniform hogs in vastly difering climates so it is not all geographic. Pork producers have no breed blinders on to influence there decisions and that is a big first step :shock:
 
The point was brought up about consistency of product comparing chickens, hogs and poultry. This may be a factor in those production systems, but seem to be less of a factor than cost per lb. to produce (other than feed), reaction time to market conditions (ramping up production in poultry and hogs is a lot easier than cattle) and the cost of grain to feed to chickens.

Chickens can have a 2 to 1 conversion in modern factory farms, something beef has yet to attain. I have not looked at the relative feed values of the rations and thier differences. That is something a feed yard nutritionist could do. In other words, I am talking about the amount of corn/soy in the ration and the relative cost of cattle vs. poultry.

Cattle will never have a comparative advantage in feeding feeds in respect to pork and chicken, but the more feed costs, the better advantage cattle have as you only have to feed them out a smaller percentage of their weight.

If you want to continue to compare chicken to beef, you might have to compare a base price of chicken 52 cents per lb. wholesale to beef's price. I would rather eat a good steak or hamburger over chicken or pork. Some things just don't compare.
 
Canadian breeders and southern breeders put out the same uniform hogs in vastly difering climates so it is not all geographic.
Click to expand...

This is my point exactly, the South would cool and dehumidify the barns while the North would heat and add moisture to the air.

So the climate is taken out of the equation.

The point about a consistant carcass, some hogs are still fatter than others, the different markets can spec a different time on feed to adjust the fat/lean ratio.

Chickens are similar but they have differences. It is easier to reproduce a generic type product than a unique product like beef. Most consumers prefer beef over the other meats, but cost and fear of paying a lot for a poor cut hurts us.

Consumer education and advancements in beef production are paying off, but for the top dog it is a slower climb. Add in a few "hobby" ranchers and a few who just do whatever they think is right and you have enough carcasses to affect many thousand eating experiences.

You won't find "hobby" hog or chicken raisers throwing their ideas into the production chain.

So again beef producers fierce sence of freedom is a benefit and a detriment at the same time.
 
Jason said:
Canadian breeders and southern breeders put out the same uniform hogs in vastly difering climates so it is not all geographic.
Click to expand...

This is my point exactly, the South would cool and dehumidify the barns while the North would heat and add moisture to the air.

So the climate is taken out of the equation.

The point about a consistant carcass, some hogs are still fatter than others, the different markets can spec a different time on feed to adjust the fat/lean ratio.

Chickens are similar but they have differences. It is easier to reproduce a generic type product than a unique product like beef. Most consumers prefer beef over the other meats, but cost and fear of paying a lot for a poor cut hurts us.

Consumer education and advancements in beef production are paying off, but for the top dog it is a slower climb. Add in a few "hobby" ranchers and a few who just do whatever they think is right and you have enough carcasses to affect many thousand eating experiences.

You won't find "hobby" hog or chicken raisers throwing their ideas into the production chain.

So again beef producers fierce sence of freedom is a benefit and a detriment at the same time.
Click to expand...
You won't find any professional chicken ranchers either. They are integrated into tyson or some other large packer , or they are out of business.
 
Sandcheska: "However, we're seeing fewer and fewer packers with more and more marketshare."
Click to expand...

Are we?

Tell us Randy, how many packers did we have 50, 40, 30, 20, and 10 years ago and how much market share they had?

This is just one more of your never ending claims that you can't back.

50 years ago, Swift, Armour, Wilson, Morris, and Cudahey had the largest market share. Today, only the names have changed. The largest company, Tyson, owns less than 1/3 of the total market share. The 5 largest companys control about 80% - 85% of the market. What percentage did Wilson, Cudahy, Swift, Armour, and Morris control?

Do you know?


Sandcheska: "If a packers wants a certain animal, they should first of all make it known what they really want, and then when they find them, let everybody else know where those carcasses came from."
Click to expand...

What part of grid premiums and discounts do you not understand???

They want a Choice Yield grade two carcass that weighs between 650 and 950 pounds.

What's not to understand?


As far as letting everybody else know where those carcasses came from, which way is it Sandcheska? Do you support Mandatory ID or not? How do you expect packers to know where a choice Y2 carcass came from without a trackable ID system? A trackable ID system is exactly what your fellow R-CULTers do not want.

You have a hell of a time keeping your arguments straight don't you?


Sandcheska: "Speaking of grading, aren't we using the same system that we've used since the inception? I think this has been brought up here before. Our grading system is antiquated. We need to use a little of what we've learned the last 50 years and devise a better system that accomodates today's markets and consumers."
Click to expand...

I agree totally! Measuring marbling does not guarantee a quality eating experience.


Excellent information from Clay Center Mike!


~SH~
 
SH, "Tell us Randy, how many packers did we have 50, 40, 30, 20, and 10 years ago and how much market share they had? This is just one more of your never ending claims that you can't back."

I appreciate your refraining from addressing my by a kiddy name, but I don't see any use in proving to you packing consolidation. It's common knowledge, SH.
 
Sandhusker said:
SH, "Tell us Randy, how many packers did we have 50, 40, 30, 20, and 10 years ago and how much market share they had? This is just one more of your never ending claims that you can't back."

I appreciate your refraining from addressing my by a kiddy name, but I don't see any use in proving to you packing consolidation. It's common knowledge, SH.
Click to expand...

More so in poultry and pork and beef packers in the substitutes.
 
Sandcheska: "I appreciate your refraining from addressing my by a kiddy name, but I don't see any use in proving to you packing consolidation. It's common knowledge, SH."
Click to expand...

What's wrong Sandcheska? Question too uncomfortable for you?

Tell us how consolidation in the packing industry has changed over the last 50 years?

What market share did Swift, Wilson, Cudahy, Armour, and Morris have and how did the names change in an industry that is "SUPPOSEDLY" controlled? How does that work?

Watch the diversion again...........

~SH~
 
~SH~ said:
Sandcheska: "I appreciate your refraining from addressing my by a kiddy name, but I don't see any use in proving to you packing consolidation. It's common knowledge, SH."
Click to expand...

What's wrong Sandcheska? Question too uncomfortable for you?

Tell us how consolidation in the packing industry has changed over the last 50 years?

What market share did Swift, Wilson, Cudahy, Armour, and Morris have and how did the names change in an industry that is "SUPPOSEDLY" controlled? How does that work?

Watch the diversion again...........

~SH~
Click to expand...


More so in poultry and pork and beef packers in the substitutes.

Back in time they were prevented from having positions in the substitutes by court order because of the frauds they were able to do. Pickett showed that those frauds are as relevant today as they were then. Now they have the PSA by the tail and are flaunting it. It only came after a few court cases and politicians who were paid off. Selling democracy. That is all it is.
 
Jason said:
However modern pig production is in environmentally controlled houses with feed rations formulated for exact intake in exact temperatures.

Cows don't do well indoors, feed can't be all ground and fed through augers.

1 line of genetically identical cows won't be adapted to all different areas that are economically viable to raise cows in.
Click to expand...
I agree Jason, and have made the point of environmental effect myself on a number of occasions. The main emphasis in terminal beef lines would be a standard terminal sire to produce as standard a final cross as possible out of damlines produced for local adaptaton and low maintenance. A company producing for a market promoted as their own branded product, can choose to use 'eared' cattle in the damline crosses in Southern states, and any hybrid their reasearch indicates suitable for their needs in the other diverse environments, possibly using breeds not even popular in the present market.
The pig market produces a number of terminal lines for different markets,
the type produced for export to China , for example is totally unsuitable for the American and European markets. In an integrated beef system, female lines unsuitable as quality beef in themselves, can be maintained as they would only be required for their maternal traits.
 
andybob said:
Jason said:
However modern pig production is in environmentally controlled houses with feed rations formulated for exact intake in exact temperatures.

Cows don't do well indoors, feed can't be all ground and fed through augers.

1 line of genetically identical cows won't be adapted to all different areas that are economically viable to raise cows in.
Click to expand...
I agree Jason, and have made the point of environmental effect myself on a number of occasions. The main emphasis in terminal beef lines would be a standard terminal sire to produce as standard a final cross as possible out of damlines produced for local adaptaton and low maintenance. A company producing for a market promoted as their own branded product, can choose to use 'eared' cattle in the damline crosses in Southern states, and any hybrid their reasearch indicates suitable for their needs in the other diverse environments, possibly using breeds not even popular in the present market.
The pig market produces a number of terminal lines for different markets,
the type produced for export to China , for example is totally unsuitable for the American and European markets. In an integrated beef system, female lines unsuitable as quality beef in themselves, can be maintained as they would only be required for their maternal traits.
Click to expand...

The pig and poultry markets taking over beef may be a temporary phenomena especially if corn and feed prices rise. As these are some of the main costs of production, when they go up, cattle look relatively cheaper and will probably have less time on feed. Thus the price of beef relative to the substitutes may be better with higher feed prices.

There is no indication that cattle will respond as poultry and pigs do to environmental control. Environmental control in itself does come at a cost, but the industries have been able to minimize this cost through its frauds in these markets. Pork may be too new to the game to see it yet, but as sure as it has happened in poultry, it will happen in pork.
 
Just been skimming the headlines lately and noticed after the swift raid, smithfield put their new building on hold. Now Swift "could be" for sale. What's the chances that someone in smithfield has enough clout to get swift investigated, and then turn around and buy them . It's probably cheaper to buy swift than build from scratch.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top